Jim on the HOF

[weams]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/18447804/does-character-count-cooperstown-hall-famers-weigh-in

[Spy Fox]

"If you're going to vote for guys in the steroid era, you have look at guys who dominated that era. You have to look at guys like Bonds and Clemens, who would have dominated (regardless). I don't really know what happened with Barry or Roger, but they were probably getting in anyway. Before Barry got jealous and envious of (Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa) for what transpired in 1998, he had already won three Most Valuable Player awards. He could beat you with his home runs, his speed, his glove and his arm. At the end of the day, he was a Hall of Fame player." -- Palmer

A lot of times this is similar to where I find myself on the steroids debate as well, although I don't particularly care about the HOF debates that much. 

Thanks for sharing Weams. 

[crissfan172]

I've always believed that those who used steroids prior to 2004 should be treated the same as those who didn't. The league didn't do anything to deter the rampant steroid use in the sport, so we ended up with an era where these so-called "cheaters" were the norm. Punishing players for using steroids in that kind of environment is unfair and completely revisionist in that it doesn't truly represent that era in the game's history. 

I would never vote for anybody that was caught using PED's after 2004, though. At that point, if you want to break the rules to make money, that's your business, but you're not worthy of the HOF. 

[Bahama O's Fan]

In my mind, if they were never caught or suspended during their playing days, then they should be able to go into the HOF, as much as I dislike Bonds.

[Moose Milligan]

Ultimately, I feel that ignoring it doesn't mean it didn't happen.  The HoF is a museum, it's about the game of baseball and everything that's happened over its history, right and wrong.  

Not admitting Bonds, Clemens (as much as I hate both of them, too), doesn't change anything that they did.  Same with Rose.  IMO, there are people in that museum that have done worse things to the game.

You can't tell the history of the game without those guys no matter how you cut it.  They have to be mentioned....they're indispensable.  

Baseball is a perfect game, it is, IMO, the best game.  But the people that have played it, managed it and surrounded it are far from perfect.  Doesn't mean that their stories shouldn't be told.  

[El Gordo]

I think Bonds and Clemens are deserving, but not this year,. There are players like Raines who belong and did it the right way.

[Moose Milligan]

3 hours ago, El Gordo said:

I think Bonds and Clemens are deserving, but not this year,. There are players like Raines who belong and did it the right way.

Doing it the right way, like sliding into second head first so he doesn't break the vials of cocaine in his back pocket? 

[crawjo]

The thing about the HOF right now is how crazily crowded the ballot is. If you just go by performance, there are up to 19 players on this ballot who are potential Hall of Famers, about 14 of them are slam dunks. Even taking off the known steroid users, there are tons of deserving Hall of Famers, guys who belong by almost any standard you would set. IMO, any writer who doesn't vote for 10 players doesn't understand the Hall of Fame or doesn't understand how to evaluate players. 

[Frobby]

Palmer on sabermetrics:

"To me, they're just tools to see where you rate. Two or three summers ago, my wife, Susan, was reading on her iPad, and somebody from SB Nation wrote that I was the

most overrated pitcher ever because my batting average on balls in play was [.251] for my whole career. They said I was really lucky and had good defense and I didn't strike a lot of guys out.

"I asked a writer I know, 'You're into sabermetrics. Can you look up, with a runner on third and less than two outs, did my strikeouts go up?' And he said, 'Yeah, they went up 17 percent.' Well, why do you think that is? Because I didn't want to give up a run.

"You've got to take all the tools available, but they're not written in stone. They're important tools to allow you to come to the conclusion you want to come to. But I don't think they tell you the whole story.''

[crawjo]

45 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Palmer on sabermetrics:

 

 

That's a good response. Palmer is not the most overrated pitcher ever, but he definitely did benefit from his defense. If you put him behind an average defense, his numbers would not look the same. That's true for every pitcher, obviously. 

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, crawjo said:

That's a good response. Palmer is not the most overrated pitcher ever, but he definitely did benefit from his defense. If you put him behind an average defense, his numbers would not look the same. That's true for every pitcher, obviously. 

He'd be the first to say he benefited from having a great defense.   He's mentioned it many times on the TV broadcasts.    But anyone who watched him pitch knows how great he was.

[crawjo]

53 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Palmer on sabermetrics:

 

 

When I first saw this, actually, I thought, "Well, that's probably true for all good pitchers. They bear down with a man on third and less than two outs to avoid giving up the run." But it's not. Based on my quick check of the math, Palmer struck out 13.7 percent of the guys he faced, but 16.9 percent with a runner on third and less than two outs. Mussina struck out 19.2 percent of the guys he faced, but just 13.1 percent of batters faced with a runner on third and less than two outs. And Nolan Ryan struck out 25.3 percent of the guys he faced, but 22.9 percent with runners on third and less than two outs. 

[Frobby]

Overall, in MLB last year the K% was 21.1% overall but only 18.5% with a runner on 3B and less than 2 out.     So yes, it's harder to strike a batter out in that situation and Palmer's uptick is pretty meaningful.    

As an aside, the O's struck out 21.7% of the time last year, but with a runner on 3B and less than two outs, they had an abysmal 24.8% K rate.    So the critics who get on the O's case about poor situational hitting weren't wrong about that in 2016.

[weams]

15 hours ago, Bahama O's Fan said:

In my mind, if they were never caught or suspended during their playing days, then they should be able to go into the HOF, as much as I dislike Bonds.

They were caught. Oh. Do you mean court of law?  Yeah well. They were all caught even if the testing phase did not always get that right 

[weams]

1 hour ago, crawjo said:

When I first saw this, actually, I thought, "Well, that's probably true for all good pitchers. They bear down with a man on third and less than two outs to avoid giving up the run." But it's not. Based on my quick check of the math, Palmer struck out 13.7 percent of the guys he faced, but 16.9 percent with a runner on third and less than two outs. Mussina struck out 19.2 percent of the guys he faced, but just 13.1 percent of batters faced with a runner on third and less than two outs. And Nolan Ryan struck out 25.3 percent of the guys he faced, but 22.9 percent with runners on third and less than two outs. 

Good work. Thanks.